Materials Today Communications 10 (2017) 14–24

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Materials Today Communications

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/mtcomm

Insulation material production from onion skin and peanut shell

fibres, fly ash, pumice, perlite, barite, cement and gypsum
Hanifi Binici a,∗ , Orhan Aksogan b
a
Department of Civil Engineering, Kahramanmaraş Sutcu Imam University, Department of Civil Engineering, Kahramanmaraş 46100, Turkey
b
Department of Civil Engineering, Toros University, Mersin 33140, Turkey

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: This study examines the suitability of fly ash, pumice, perlite, barite, cement and gypsum along with
Received 12 April 2016 onion skin and peanut shell fibers as an insulating material. Apparent specific gravities, water absorption
Received in revised form 25 July 2016 rates, flexure and compressive strengths of the prepared samples were determined. Moreover, thermal
Accepted 2 September 2016
conductivity, ultrasonic sound penetration coefficient and radioactive relative permeability values were,
Available online 7 October 2016
also, investigated. The latter three properties of the samples produced with barite, pumice, perlite, onion
skins and peanut shells were observed to be low. Consequently, this composite can be used in various
Keywords:
situations because of its improved thermal conductivity feature, especially, as coating material in offices
Insulation
Onion skin
which are exposed to radiation a lot. Moreover, it can, also, be used for the radiation insulation of the
Peanut shell walls of the radiation units of hospitals.
Barite © 2016 Published by Elsevier Ltd.
Radioactivity

1. Introduction that, the amount of lignin is higher in peanut shells compared to

The need for energy conservation throughout the world
enhances the relevance of the researches concerning the use of
new resources and technologies capable of producing biofuels, such
as the peanut processing residues [1]. Other examples, like agro-
industrial residues, i.e. wood and some urban residues, with a dry
matter composed of cellulose, hemicellulose and lignin constitute
sources of biomass [2–4]. Peanut shells should also be considered
in this context.
As a result of recent researches, the areas of usage of peanut
shells, which have an important application both in Turkey and all
around the world, are enhanced.
As a result of some recent researches, peanut shells started to
constitute a many areas of usage both in Turkey and all around the
world, which can be listed as active carbon, chipboard, plywood,
composite materials and plastic plaque productions. In addition, in
the form of waste, peanut shell is used as fertilizer preservative [5].
There are not many researches conducted on the use of peanut
shells in the production of construction materials [6].The results of
the analysis in the present work are given in Table 1. It is observed
∗ Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: hbinici@ksu.edu.tr (H. Binici), aksogan@cu.edu.tr
(O. Aksogan).
other botanic structures [7].
Fibers of agricultural raw materials constitute an important class
of sustainable materials with usage areas in construction. Many
wood product standards make mention of alternative sources of
ligno-cellulosic fibers, which constitute the primary sources of use-
ful ligno-cellulosic fibers in biomass. Fibers of agricultural materials
and their particles are in many ways similar to wood fibers and
particles. Specific characteristics depend on species and degree of
processing. The US construction materials industry based on agri-
cultural fibers has been in a nascent stage for many years, when only
few companies were lucky enough to have long term success. How-
ever, agricultural fibers are currently used extensively in textiles,
and much interest has been given to agricultural-based composite
materials for products such as automobile interiors. However, huge
amounts of agricultural fibers are leftovers of food production and
are generally burned or used in landfilling since no other alternative
has been found to use them. In construction industry agricultural
fibers have been competing with wood, while other materials can
also be mixed with wood fibers to obtain better properties [8].
Most construction materials contain some natural radioactivity.
Since terrestrial radiation in buildings does not only come from the
soil, but also from the construction materials used, an additional
rate which is absorbed is measured in most buildings [9,10]. The
EU details Radiation Protection principles in issue 112 of radiation
protection. To put restrictions on the limits the dose criterion based
on the conditions in the EU countries must be used.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.mtcomm.2016.09.004
2352-4928/© 2016 Published by Elsevier Ltd.
 H. Binici, O. Aksogan / Materials Today Communications 10 (2017) 14–24
Table 1
The chemical contents of peanut shells.
Components (%)
Cellulose 45,3
Lignin 32,8
Hemicellulose 8,1
Ash 3,8
Protein 4,9
There is a progressive decrease in the value of natural sources
per person due to an increase in the world population. Hence, nat-
ural sources must be protected by recycling. Moreover, material
consumption can be reduced by natural sources being used in a
more efficient way by recycling of qualified wastes. Thus, recycling
is very important for the protection of natural sources and their effi-
cient usage [11]. In recent years, most of waste materials have been
widely used for different purposes in the production of construction
materials [12–19].
Presently, energy conservation gained priority due to economic
and strategic reasons. In U.S., 40% of total-consumed-energy is con-
sumed within buildings, and approximately half of this rate occurs
via heat passing through the walls [20]. Recently, innovative con-
struction materials and construction systems, that began to be
used in building construction commonly, brought a lot of benefits
in terms of construction physics and comfort. Within this frame,
insulation of building walls is a subject open-to-research, since it
provides the opportunity of energy conservation [21–23]. Recently
high energy prices force the development of new thermal insulation
materials.
Although abondant amounts of onion skin and peanut shell
wastes is produced in Turkey, after their production their left-
overs cause a serious problem for farmers. They are discharged
somehow, burned or used for simple heating purposes. All of these
alternatives cause serious environmental problems. To circumvent
these problems, the present study proposes a method of evaluating
those waste materials for the insulation of buildings and prevent
the harm they cause to the environment. In the direction of this
Fig. 1. Onion skins, peanut shells, pumice, perlite and barite used in this study.
15
aim, onion skin waste and peanut shells have been pulped and
turned into insulation materials. To this end, waste onion skins and
peanut shells were ground to a size of 1 millimeter and fly ash,
pumice, perlite, barite, cement and gypsum were added to pro-
duce samples with a size of 4 × 4 × 16 centimeters. These samples
◦
were kept in an oven for 24 h at 100 C. Apparent specific gravities,
water absorption rates, flexure and compressive strengths of the
samples were determined. Moreover, thermal conductivity coef-
ficients, ultrasonic sound penetration coefficients and radioactive
permeability values were also investigated.
2. Material and method
2.1. Material
2.1.1. Onion skin and peanut shell
Onion skin is a waste material and is usually casted away. In
this study, it is aimed to be used in the production of an insulation
material. Also, peanut is a food that has been produced widely all
around the world and its shell is not capitalized commonly. Onion
skins and peanut shells are thrown away after they are used for spe-
cific purposes. The importance of recycling is acknowledged due to
the rapid growth in population, development of comfortable life
conditions, urbanization and increase in education levels of soci-
eties. Onion skins, peanut shells, pumice, perlite and barite used in
this study are given in Fig. 1. The chemical contents of peanut shells
and onion skins are given in Tables 1 and 2, respectively.
2.1.2. Fly ash
Fly ash is a waste material consisting of alumina silica, which
occurs when high quality brown coal is burnt in vessels leaving
ashes with components mentioned in standards. Fly ash is com-
posed of glass-like vacuolar grains, spongy mineral grains and
unburned grains. In general, 85% of fly ashes is composed of SiO2 ,
Al2 O3 , CaO and MgO [24].
16 H. Binici, O. Aksogan / Materials Today Communications 10 (2017) 14–24

Table 2 Table 5
The chemical contents of onion skins. The physical properties of onion skins and peanut shells.

Components (%) Materials Humidity (%) Colour Water absorption (%) pH

Cellulose 37,3 Onion skin 32 Red 11 67

Carbohydrate 9,4 Peanut shell 17 Brown 19 43
Glucose 15,2
Fructose 17,1
Sugar 8,7
Protein 6,9
Oil 1,4
Sodium 1,7
2.1.7. Gypsum
Potasium 2,3 A commercially available gypsum plaster mix characterized
according to TS EN 13279-1 [26], was used in this study.
The chemical component contents of fly ash, pumice, barite and
cement are given in Table 3 and their physical properties are given
2.1.3. Pumice in Table 4. The physical properties of the onion skins and peanut
Pumice is a vacuolar, igneous rock which is glass-like, resis- shells are given in Table 5.
tant to physical and chemical effects and procured as a result of
igneous events. It is a material that contains a high amount of non-
affiliated pores, approximately 50% moisture water and when it is
powdered, it becomes quite hard and gains resistance against pres- 2.2. Method
sure, heat conduction and sound transition. Pumices may be acidic
or basic [10]. The pumice which is used in this study was taken from 2.2.1. Preparation of samples
Osmaniye region in the south of Turkey. Before pulping the onion skins and peanut shells of equal weight
they were first dried in an oven at 110 ◦ C for 60 min. Then, equal
amounts of each were put in the composite to act as fibers.Since
2.1.4. Perlite these fibers are supposed to resist tensile stresses in the composite
Perlite which already has an important function in construction they should be of equal length and enough in quantity. After that,
sector is a material that can be used as a construction material. It the mix was ground and sifted with a sieve that has 1 mm open-
consists of 74% SiO2 and 15% Al2 O3 . It is an igneous-characterized ings. In order to soften the mix, it was kept in water for 24 h. When
material. When it is compared to the other construction materials the mix was softened enough it was mixed fairly well in a mixer
that can be alternatives for it, it is 50% lighter than most of them. in order to make it homogeneous. After being pulped, the mix was
filtered with micro-perforated fabric filter in order to dewater it.
Different samples were produced by adding fly ash, pumice, per-
2.1.5. Barite lite, barite and cement or gypsum at given rates which are given
Barite (BaSO4 ) is a mineral that consists of barium sulfate. It is in Table 6. Aforementioned cement and gypsum were added to the
generally colorless, white, yellow or gray. Barite commonly occurs onion skin and peanut shell pulp in order to improve its adher-
in lead-zinc veins of lime rocks, in hot bonding beds with hematite ence property. The samples with the size of 4 × 4 × 16 cm are given
ore. It is usually found with anglesite and celestine minerals. Its in Fig. 2. For producing the samples, standard 4 × 4 × 16 cm size
MOHS hardness is 3 and specific weight is from 4.3 to 5 g/cm3 [10]. moulds were used. Gypsum and cement were added as binders to
give them enough hardness. The mixing ratios given in Table 6 were
determined according to the results of trial samples.
2.1.6. Cement The unit weights, ultrasonic sound penetration velocities, ther-
In this study, CEM I cement was used and its chemical compo- mal conductivity coefficients, compressive and bending strengths
sition was determined according to Turkish Standard EN TS 196-2 and radiation conductivity values of the samples were all deter-
[25]. mined in accordance with the related standards.

Table 3
The chemical contents of materials.

Materials (%)

SiO2 Al2 O3 Fe2 O3 CaO MgO SO3 BaSO4 Ignition Loss

Fly ash 187 917 335 5343 176 1040 – –

Pumice 436 148 126 98 89 – 955 08
Perlite 6712 1181 373 123 016 225 – 204
Barite 128 038 011 03 – – –
Cement 208 54 32 649 18 07 – –

Table 4
The physical properties of materials.

Materials Specific gravity (g/cm3 ) Blaine (cm2 /g) Sieve analysis (%)

Residue on 90 ␮m Residue on 200 ␮m Residue on 2 mm Residue on 125 mm

Fly ash 2656 3500 0,5 0,03 – –

Pumice 1878 2600 0,5 0,05 – –
Perlite 1641 2600 0,2 0,02 – –
Barite 4478 2600 0,3 0,03 – –
Cement 3190 2600 0,5 0,05 – –
Gypsum 0.95 1800 – – 18 0,2
 H. Binici, O. Aksogan / Materials Today Communications 10 (2017) 14–24 17

Table 6
Mixing ratios (g).

Samples Fly ash Pumice Perlite Barite Cement Gypsum Water Onion skins and peanut shells

Control (C C) – – – – 50 – 35 200
Control (C-G) – – – – – 50 35 200
FA15PU15C 15 15 – – 50 – 25 150
FA25PU25C 25 25 – – 50 – 25 150
FA50PU50C 50 50 – – 50 – 25 150
FA15PE15C 15 – 15 50 – 25 150
FA25PE25C 25 – 25 50 – 25 150
FA150PER0C 50 – 50 50 – 25 150
PU25C – 30 – – 50 – 25 150
PU50C – 50 – – 50 – 25 150
PU100C – 100 – – 50 – 25 150
PE30C – – 30 – 50 – 25 150
PE50C – – 50 – 50 – 25 150
PE100C – – 100 – 50 – 25 150
BA30C – – – 30 50 – 25 150
BA50C – – – 50 50 – 25 150
BA100C – – – 100 50 – 25 150
FAPU30G 15 15 – – – 50 25 150
FAPU50G 25 25 – – – 50 25 150
FAPU100G 100 50 – – – 50 25 150
FAPE30G 15 – 15 – – 50 25 150
FAPE50G 25 – 25 – – 50 25 150
FAPE100G 100 – 100 – – 50 25 150
PU25G – 30 – – – 50 25 150
PU50G – 50 – – – 50 25 150
PU100G – 100 – – – 50 25 150
PE25G – – 30 – – 50 25 150
PE.50G – – 50 – – 50 25 150
PE100G – – 100 – – 50 25 150
BA25G – – – 25 – 50 25 150
BA50G – – – 50 – 50 25 150
BA100G – – – 100 – 50 25 150

Fig. 3. Measurement of Ultrasonik sound penetration velocity.

Fig. 2. Sample preparation.

2.2.2. Unit weight and water absorption values
The unit weights and water absorption values of the produced
samples were determined, the former being carried out in accor-
dance with TS EN 2823 [27] and the latter in accordance with ASTM
C 67–03 [28]. The samples were taken out from the moulds and
kept in tap water for one day. The water absorption test results
were found as the average of the three specimens with the size of
4 × 4 × 16 cm. If the individual variation was more than ±5% of the
average, the value was not considered in calculating the average
value.
2.2.3. Ultrasonic sound penetration velocity
To determine the wave velocity the transfer duration of voice
through the material was measured using an ultrasonic test device.
The relationship between the strength and other features of the
material are approximately procured with the calculated super-
sonic wave velocity [29]. After measuring the duration it takes the
supersonic wave to travel from one surface to the other, the wave
velocity is calculated as follows:
V = (S/t).106
V = wave velocity,
S = surface of the material used to send the supersonic wave, the
distance between the surface,
t = The time it took for a sound wave to travel from one surface
of the material to the other.
In this experiment, both smooth surfaces of the samples are
examined and two hand pieces of pundit device are lubricated with
grease oil. Those two hand pieces are fixed on the opposite surfaces
of the sample and, then, readings of the pundit device are made. The
ultrasonic sound penetration test device and the testing process is
shown in Fig. 3.
18 H. Binici, O. Aksogan / Materials Today Communications 10 (2017) 14–24

tigation, Fe-55 and Am-241 radio-isotopes were used as radiation

sources and a Si(Li) solid state detector with 155 eV resolution at
5.9 keV was employed. At first, count is performed without sam-
ples in order to designate how much radiation the samples absorb.
Later, samples are irradiated and absorptions per unit thickness are
calculated via the expression below:

␮ = ln (Io /Ix )

Here; Io : Beam intensity measured in the absence of the sample,

Ix : Beam intensity passing through the sample of thickness x. This
way I0 , Ix , and (Ix /I0 ) rates at different energy levels are calculated
and permeability rate values are determined.

3. Results and discussion

Fig. 4. Thermal conductivity test device and application.

3.1. Unit weight and water absorption values

2.2.4. Thermal conductivity
Thermal conductivity coefficient is found with Hot Wire Method
given in ASTM C 1113- 90 [30]. The most widely used nonsteady
method is the transient hot-wire method. A thin wire is embedded
in the test material which is at room temperature before the exper-
iment starts. The test is conducted by heating the wire electrically.
Heat is released in the radial direction into the surroundings and
the wire temperature climbs with a transient which is more or less
steep depending on the thermal conductivity of the test medium.
According to Turkish Standard TS EN 415 [31], if the thermal con-
ductivity coefficient of a material is under the value of 0.060 kcal/m
h ◦ C, that material is called as “thermal insulator”. If its conductivity
coefficient is higher than the critical value, 0.060 kcal/mh ◦ C, then it
is classified as “construction material”. Materials used in buildings
have different thermal conductivity values. This test was performed
at the temperature of 22 ◦ C. The thermal conductivity test device
and the testing process is shown in Fig. 4.
2.2.5. Compressive and flexural strengths
The samples were taken out from the moulds and the compres-
sive strengths of the samples with the size of 4 × 4 × 4 cm and the
flexural strengths of the samples with the size of 4 × 4 × 16 cm were
determined with DiwickRoell Z010 Universal test device. The com-
pressive and flexure strengths of the samples were tested according
to TS EN 2823. The test results were found as the average of three
specimens. If the individual variation was more than ±5% of the
average, the value was not considered in calculating the average
value.
2.2.6. Radiation permeability
The radiation permeability values of the samples were deter-
mined at 6 keV, 17.7 keV, 20.7 keV, 26 keV and 60 keV energies, and
their levels of radiation handling were designated. For this inves-
Unit weight values (g/cm3)
3.1.1. Unit weight and water absorption values of cement-added
samples
Unit weight values of cement-added samples are given in Fig. 5
and their water absorption values are given in Fig. 6.
Unit weights of samples increase when fly ash additives
increase. Unit weight values of perlite and pumice-added sam-
ples are observed to be lower. Unit weight values of barite-added
samples are observed to be the highest. Samples with higher unit
weights are observed to have lower water absorption values. Water
absorption value of the control sample is the highest.
3.1.2. Unit weight and water absorption values of gypsum-added
samples
Unit weight values of gypsum-added samples are given in Fig. 7
and their water absorption values are given in Fig. 8.
It is seen that unit weight values of gypsum-added samples are
lower and water absorption values are higher when compared to
the cement-added samples. Water absorption rates of vacuolar and
light materials are found to be higher. Naturally, the control sample
has absorbed more water as it is completely produced by onion
skins, peanut shells with cement or gypsum. Unit weight values of
insulation materials produced with pumice and perlite are lower
and their water absorption levels are higher.
In this study, especially unit weight values of the gypsum-added
samples are lower than those of the cement-added ones. In the fly
ash and barite-added samples, it is seen that while mineral additive
rate increases, unit weight values increase and water absorption
rates decrease. However, in the pumice and perlite-added samples,
it is seen that while the mineral additive rate increases, both the
unit weight values and the water absorption rates increase. This
is because fly ash and barite have void-free grain structures giv-
ing the composite a filler effect. Thanks to this effect, as the space

4
3,45
3,5
2,89 2,97
3
2,5
1,88
1,57 1,59
1,33 1,24 1,15 1,32 1,46
2
1,5 1,23 1,44 1,25 1,29 1,33
1
0,5
0
C
C

0C

0C
0C

C
-C

0C
C

5C

0C

C
30

00
15

25

50

50

50

30
25
C

E3

10

A5
10
E1

E5

A1
U

PU

PU
PE

PE

BA
PE
PU
P

B
P

B
15

25

50

15

25

50
FA

FA
FA

FA

FA

FA

Samples

Fig. 5. Unit weight values of the cemented samples.

 H. Binici, O. Aksogan / Materials Today Communications 10 (2017) 14–24 19

Water absorption ratios (%)

100
90
80
67
70
60 55 54
48
50 43
38
40 34 31
27 28 29
30 22 24 24
17 15
20
10
0
-C

5C

0C

0C

0C

0C

C
0C
15

50

30

50
15

25

50

00

00
C

5
2

10

PE

PE
PU

PU

BA

BA
PU

PE

PE

PE

1
PU

PU

PU

PE

BA
15

25

50
15

25

50

FA

FA

FA
FA

FA

FA

Samples

Fig. 6. Water absorption ratios of the cement added samples.

4
Unite weight value (g/cm3)

3,5 3,33

3 2,65
2,49
2,5
1,89
2 1,65
1,44 1,5 1,41 1,33
1,5 1,24 1,33 1,25 1,12 1,23 1,11
1,04
1

0,5

0
-G

5G

0G

0G

0G

G
15

50

30

50

30

50

30
15

25

50

00
C

10

5
2

10
PE

PE
PU

BA
PU

BA

1
PE

PE
PU

PU

PU

PE

PU

PE

BA
15

25

50
15

25

50
FA

FA

FA
FA

FA

FA

Samples

Fig. 7. Unite weight values of gypsum added samples.

100
Water absorption ratio (%)

90
80 72
70
60 63
57
60 51 53 53
48 45
50 44
38 39 39
40 32 29
30 22
20
10
0
-G

5G

0G

0G

0G

0G

G
15

50

30

50

30
15

25

50

00

00
C

10

5
2

PE

PE
PU

PU

BA

BA
PE

PE

PE

1
PU

PU

PU

PU

PE

BA
15

25

50
15

25

50

FA

FA

FA
FA

FA

FA

Samples

Fig. 8. Water absorption ratios of gypsum added samples.

rate decreases the unit weight values increase while the absorp- 3.2. Ultrasonic sound penetration velocities and thermal
tion rates decrease. It is observed that while the unit weight values conductivity coefficients
of the gypsum-added samples are lower compared to those of the
cement-added ones, their water absorption rates are observed to 3.2.1. Ultrasonic sound penetration velocity and thermal
be higher. This is because gypsum is a lighter and more flexible conductivity coefficients of cement-added samples
material than cement. Noise pollution is pulling increasingly more attention in con-
struction industry as it is a major health concern. Hence, a great
demand for better noise insulating materials is increasing [32].
20 H. Binici, O. Aksogan / Materials Today Communications 10 (2017) 14–24

1,12 1,16 1,25

1,3

The ultrasonic sound penetration

1,2
1,1
1 0,89 0,83
0,9 0,82 0,77 0,82 0,73
0,8 0,69

velocity (km/s)
0,7
0,6
0,5 0,33
0,22 0,16 0,27 0,22 0,16
0,4
0,3
0,2
0,1
0

C
C

0C

0C

0C
0C
-C

25 5C

K5 25C

15 0C

K2 15C

0C

0C

PE C
K5 25C

50

00
30

50
C

10
1

10

E3

A3

A5
5

E5

U
U

A1
PU
E
U

PE
E

U
0P

B
P

0P

5P

B
P
15
K

K
U

U
Samples

Fig. 9. The ultrasonic sound penetration velocities of the cement- added samples.

0,4

0,313
0,3

0,2310,239
Thermal conductivity cofficient

0,2
0,189
0,15
0,13
0,0910,083 0,09 0,0810,086 0,081
0,1 0,0780,076 0,07
0,062

0
0C

C
-C

0C

0C
C

5C

C
C

C
15

50

50

30

0
30
15

25

50

50

0
C

E3

A5
10

0
E2

10
U
PE

PE

A1
PE

BA
PU

PU

PU

PU

PE
P

B
P

P
P

B
15

25

50
15

25

50
FA

FA

FA
FA

FA

FA

Samples

Fig. 10. Thermal conductivity cofficients of the cement-added samples.

Ultrasonic sound penetration velocities of cement-added samples coefficients of this group of samples are appreciably lower when
are given in Fig. 9 and their thermal conductivity parameters are compared to the cement-added ones.
given in Fig. 10. According to Turkish and international standards, for a mate-
Ultrasonic sound penetration velocity of barite and fly ash- rial that can be considered as an insulation material, its thermal
added samples with higher unit weight values, are observed to be conductivity coefficient should be lower than 0.1 W/mK. When
high. In other words, sound is not absorbed while passing through Figs. 10 and 12 are examined it can be seen that samples FA50PU50
those samples as their void ratios are very little. However, pumice and FA25PE25 which are completely pumice, perlite and cement-
and perlite-added samples that have vacuolar structure have lower added and samples FA25PU25, FA50PE50, FA15PE15, FA25PE25,
rates of ultrasonic sound penetration velocity. In those samples the FA50PE50 which are pumice or perlite and gypsum-added can be
voids hinder the transfer of waves. accepted as insulation materials. This can be explained by their
Thermal insulation plays an important role in contributing to micro-structures which have a lot of direct or indirect voids. More-
the energy savings in buildings [33,34]. There is a direct relationship over, ultrasonic sound penetration velocities of aforementioned
between the thermal conductivity coefficients and ultrasonic sound samples also show the same behaviour since their ultrasonic sound
penetration velocities of the samples. In other words, when the penetration velocities are observed to be low. This is because both
former ones increase, the latter ones increase too. This is naturally pumice and perlite have vacuolar structures. This situation is a
due to their relations to the void structure. result of the fact that aforementioned sound waves are absorbed
when they pass through the samples. However, ultrasonic sound
3.2.2. Ultrasonic sound penetration velocity and thermal penetration velocities and thermal conductivity coefficients of
conductivity coefficients of gypsum-added samples samples with codes BA and FA are observed to be higher. An inter-
Ultrasonic sound penetration velocities of gypsum-added sam- esting result here is that samples with codes PU and PE which are
ples are given in Fig. 11 and their thermal conductivity parameters gypsum-added have lower ultrasonic sound penetration velocities
in Fig. 12. The ultrasonic sound penetration velocity of gypsum- and thermal conductivity coefficients than those of the ones which
added samples is observed to be lower than that of cement-added contain cement. This is because gypsum has lower unit weight and
ones. This means that sound is absorbed while passing through the thermal conductivity coefficient values when compared to those of
material in the former. This is because gypsum-added samples are cement.
more flexible and have more voids. Similarly, thermal conductivity
 H. Binici, O. Aksogan / Materials Today Communications 10 (2017) 14–24 21

The ultrasonic sound penetration

1,2
1,1
1
0,9 0,81 0,77
0,74 0,7
0,8 0,65 0,69 0,61 0,61
0,7

velocity
0,52 0,52

(km/s)
0,6
0,5
0,4 0,27 0,22
0,3 0,18 0,16 0,1
0,2 0,11
0,1
0

0G

0G
0G

G
G

5G

0G

G
-G

G
15

FA U25

50

30

00

00
25

30
30

50
C

10

E5

A5
1

E5
PU

PU

U
PE

E1

A1
PE

BA
PU
PE

B
P

B
15

25

50

25

50
15
FA

FA
FA

FA

FA
Samples

Fig. 11. The ultrasonic sound penetration velocities of gypsum-added samples.

Thermal conductivity coefficient

0,3

0,223
0,2
0,165
0,144
0,103 0,105 0,1
0,0840,078 0,0880,076 0,08 0,076
0,1 0,07 0,0660,0660,058

0
G

PU G

0G
0G

G
-G

0G
50 5G

0G

PE G

G
15

30

50

50

00
FA U 50

FA E15

FA E25

30

50
C

FA U2

10

A3
10
E5

A1
U

PU

PU

PE

PE

BA
B
P

B
15

25

15

25

50
FA

FA

Samples

Fig. 12. Thermal conductivity cofficients of gypsum-added samples.

In addition to this, when pumice and perlite grains exist in bulk raw materials of the C-G sample and the hardening effect of the
and are adhered to cement or gypsum in a weak or strong way, cement on the samples. In general, the compressive strengths of
their thermal conductivity coefficients become lower due to the the cement-added samples are observed to be higher than those of
voids that occur within their own bodies and in their borders with the gypsum-added ones and their flexure strengths to be lower. The
the neighboring grains. Naturally, when the unit weights of the flexure strengths of samples with fibers of onion skins and peanut
samples increase, their thermal conductivity coefficients increase, shells were, generally, found to be higher than those of the con-
too. trol samples (C-G). While this trend can be explained by the effect
of cement on the compressive strength, the high flexure strengths
3.3. Flexure and compressive strengths of gypsum-added samples can be due to the flexible structure of
gypsum. On the other hand, flexure strengths of pumice and perlite-
3.3.1. Flexure and compressive strengths of cement-added added samples are observed to be lower than those of fly ash and
samples barite-added ones. Actually, it is logical for the samples with lower
The compressive strengths of cement-added samples with weights per unit volume and thermal conductivity coefficients to
4 × 4 × 4 cm dimensions are given in Fig. 13 and the flexure have lower compressive strengths.
strengths of those with 4 × 4 × 16 cm dimensions in Fig. 14. When mineral additive ratios increase, the compressive
The flexure strengths of samples with fibers of onion skins and strengths of the cement-added samples and the flexure strengths
peanut shells were, generally, found to be higher than those of the of the gypsum-added samples increase, too. These results can be
control ones (C-C). explained by the flexibility caused by gypsum and the hardness
caused by the cement within the composite. The compressive
3.3.2. Flexure and compressive strengths of gypsum-added strengths of barite-added samples are observed to be high, which
samples can be explained by the specific weight of barite. In any case, the
The compressive strengths of gypsum-added samples with foregoing properties have all been found to be adequate for insula-
12 × 12 × 2 cm dimensions are given in Fig. 15 and the flexure tion materials.
strengths of the ones with 2 × 3 × 3 cm dimensions are given in Finally, the most important result of this study is that waste
Fig. 16. materials, which cause environmental pollution is prevented and a
The compressive strength of the control sample (C-G) is satisfactory insulation material is produced entirely of organic ori-
observed to be lower and its flexure strength to be higher than gin. This product is a candidate to be commercialized in the future.
those of the ones with additives. This can be explained by the Insulation has a great importance throughout the world, since the
structures of the onion skin waste and peanut shells which are the consumption of its energy sources cannot be prevented. Structures
22 H. Binici, O. Aksogan / Materials Today Communications 10 (2017) 14–24

0,8
0,69

Compressive strength (MPa)

0,7
0,6
0,56
0,46 0,44 0,45
0,5 0,42 0,4
0,35 0,38 0,37
0,34
0,29 0,32 0,28 0,31 0,31
0,4
0,3
0,2
0,1
0
-C

50 5C

PU C
25 5C
C

5 0 5C

PE C
0C

BA C
0C
0C
30

50

30

50

30

50
15

F A U 50

50
C

FA U 2

10
1

10

10
PE

PE
PU

PU

BA

BA
PE

PE

PE
PU

P
15
15

25

FA

FA
FA

FA

Samples

Fig. 13. Compressive strengths of the cement-added samples.

0,15
Flexural strength (MPa)

0,1
0,076
0,0510,045
0,042 0,038
0,05 0,0310,0260,0370,028 0,032
0,025
0,0330,029
0,021 0,018 0,018

0
-C

25 5C

50 5C

PU C
C

5 0 5C

1 5 0C

PE C
0C

BA C
0C
0C
30

50

30

50

30

50
15

50
C

FA U 2

FA U 5

10
F A E1

F A E2

10

10
PE

PE

BA

BA
PU

PU
PE
PU

P
P

P
15

25
FA

FA

Samples

Fig. 14. Flexural strengths of the cement-added samples.

Compressive strength (MPa)

0,5
0,42 0,41
0,4 0,36 0,35 0,36
0,31 0,33 0,31 0,31
0,28 0,29
0,3 0,26 0,25 0,24
0,22 0,22
0,2

0,1

0
-G

25 5G

50 5G

15 0G

50 5G

PU G
0G
25 5G

PE G
0G

BA G
0G
30

50

30

50

30

50
50
C

10
1

10

10
PE

PE

BA
PU

PU

BA
PE

PE

PE
PU

PU

PU
15

FA

FA

FA
FA

FA

FA

Samples

Fig. 15. Compressive strengths of the gypsum-added samples.

made using insulating materials are both economic and harmless. ing in an insulation cover seems to be the best alternative, so far.
Many advantages can be gained by the insulation materials pro- Presently, the environmentally friendly structural materials which
posed in this study. can be renewed easily, constitute a subject of main interest. Besides
The low thermal conductivity and fibrous character of the classical insulating materials, natural alternative materials such as
majority of organic materials contribute to an appreciable improve- jute, flax and hemp are available. The latter are not substitutes for
ment of thermal-insulation properties by covering the structure the former, but a widening of their product range. For putting these
externally [35]. Natural organic materials have additional physical new alternatives into application their improving and worsening
properties compared to ordinary silicate materials, like containing effects must be considered carefully.
a higher specific heat capacity. The present study proposes a use of organic waste materials
To guarantee the thermal protection necessities, considering which will improve thermal conductivity and sound insulation
both comfort, hygiene and energy savings, wrapping the build- properties and, at least, not worsen the compressive and flexure
 H. Binici, O. Aksogan / Materials Today Communications 10 (2017) 14–24 23

0,1

0,066 0,068
0,065
0,062
0,053 0,055
0,046 0,048
0,05
0,039 0,039 0,041 0,041
Flexural strength

0,033
0,03
0,025
(MPa)

0,017

0
-G

25 5 G

50 5 G

15 0 G

2 5 5G

5 0 5G

PU G
0G

PE G
0G

BA G
0G
50

30

50

30

50

30

50
C

10
1

10

10
5

PE

PE
PU

PU

PU

PU

BA

BA
PU

PE

PE

PE
15

FA

FA

FA
FA

FA

FA

Samples

Fig. 16. Flexural strengths of the gypsum-added samples.

strengths. These new light-weight construction materials will pro- The control sample being completely prepared with onion skin
vide an appreciable amount of energy saving in buildings. and peanut shell, its radioactive permeability is observed to be the
best at energy level 6 keV (99.5%). Samples with fly ash additives
usually cannot retain sufficient ␥ beams at energy levels 60 keV and
3.4. Radioactive permeability 26 keV. However, they give better results at 20.7 keV and lower
levels. When additive ratios of pumice, perlite and barite-added
Radioactive permeability is observed at energy levels 60 keV, samples increase, it is seen that their radiation permeability values
26 keV, 20,7 keV, 17.7 keV and 6 keV. Ix , Io, Ix /Io and ␮ values of the decrease. This situation is pretty interesting for pumice and perlite
samples procured at these energy levels are given in Table 7. although it is expected for barite. It can be said that the foregoing
trend may be caused by the vacuolar structure of pumice and per-
lite. However, the chemical structures of those two minerals may
Table 7 also have contribution in this respect. It is observed that barite-
Radiation transmittance values of the samples (␮).
added samples absorb almost all of the applied radiation, whereas,
Samples Energy (keV) pumice and perlite-added samples do not absorb the radiation, that
60 26 20.7 17.7 6
well. However, the latter can be used as coating material in offices
which are exposed to a lot of radiation. Moreover, it can, also, be
C-C 0411 0.201 0.111 0.012 0
used for the radiation insulation of walls in the radiation units of
C-G 0235 0.133 0.100 0.002 0
FS15PU15C 0135 0.025 0.010 0.011 0 hospitals.
FA25PU25C 0.022 0.013 0.002 0.001 0 The test results show that the correct combination of natural
FA50PU50C 0.020 0.014 0.004 0 0 materials may render improvements compared to conventional
FA15PE15C 0.131 0.018 0.006 0 0 ones. Besides, samples with barite have low radioactive perme-
FA25PE25C 0.043 0.015 0.002 0 0
FA50PE50C 0.021 0.007 0.004 0 0
ability. They are more suitable for places in which there is more
PU25C 0.007 0 0 0 0 radioactive effect. They should be preferred for walls and cover-
PU50C 0 0 0 0 0 ings of medical buildings [7]. Thus, harmful effects of radioactivity
PU100C 0 0 0 0 0 can be decreased.
PE25C 0.003 0.001 0 0 0
PE50C 0 0 0 0 0
PE100C 0 0 0 0 0
BA25C 0.009 0 0 0 0 4. Conclusions
BA50C 0.002 0 0 0 0
BA100C 0.001 0 0 0 0 The following conclusions were drawn from the present study:
FA15PU15G 0.040 0.017 0.010 0.005 0
FA25PU25G 0.023 0.010 0.014 0 0
FA50PU50G 0.011 0.004 0 0 0 1 Unit weights of fly ash and barite-added samples are observed to
FA15PE15G 0.024 0.006 0 0 0
be higher, whereas, their water absorption levels are observed to
FA25PE25G 0.012 0.003 0 0 0
FA50PE50G 0.004 0 0 0 0 be lower in comparison to the others.
PU30G 0.001 0 0 0 0 2 Unit weight values of pumice and perlite-added samples are
PU50G 0 0 0 0 0 observed to be lower, yet their water absorption levels are
PU100G 0 0 0 0 0 observed to be higher in comparison to the others.
PE30G 0.006 0 0 0 0
PE50G 0.002 0 0 0 0
3 Ultrasonic sound penetration velocity and thermal conductivity
PE100G 0 0 0 0 0 coefficients of pumice and perlite-added samples are observed
BA30G 0.004 0 0 0 0 to be lower than the others.
BA50G 0 0 0 0 0 4 All samples fulfill the compressive and flexure strength require-
BA100G 0 0 0 0 0
ments of ASTM and Turkish Standards.
24 H. Binici, O. Aksogan / Materials Today Communications 10 (2017) 14–24
5 The radiation absorption properties of pumice and perlite-added
samples are observed to be better than both the control and the
fly ash-added samples.
6 The highest absorption level is observed in barite-added samples.
7 The thermal conductivity coefficients of samples made with
onion skins and peanut shells are 3.5–5 times smaller than those
of the control ones. This is caused by the fiber ratios. These light-
weight construction materials will provide an appreciaple energy
saving in buildings.
8 Using onion skin and peanut shell wastes causes a definite
decrease in the values of sound permeability, keeping compres-
sive and flexure strengths at levels required by the standards.
Finally, it can be said that pumice and barite-added samples
display positive effects concerning radiation absorption. Those
minerals increase the linear absorption coefficients of composites
produced with onion skin and peanut shells. Those composites can
be used towards the aim of protection against hazardous beams
in places where radiation is effective. Protection against radioac-
tive effect is important for radiotherapy rooms, nuclear reactors
and similar houses. In order to prevent harmful effects of radia-
tion, high-intensity concretes or concrete surfaces are covered with
lead [7]. Within the scope of this study, a radiation absorbing mate-
rial is produced through a mixture of onion skin and peanut shell
wastes together with fly ash, pumice, perlite, barite, cement or gyp-
sum. According to procured results, it is observed that especially
pumice, perlite and barite-added samples have decreased radia-
tion permeability. These samples can also be used on walls that
cover medical buildings and in laboratories in which x-ray oper-
ations are held. In this way, negative effects of radiation can be
reduced. Moreover, as thermal conductivity parameters of perlite
and pumice-added composites are pretty low, they can be utilized
as thermal insulation materials.
References
[1] T.C. Polachini, A.C.K. Sato, R.L. Cunha, J. Telis-Romero, Density and rheology of
acid suspensions of peanut waste in different conditions: an engineering basis
for bioethanol production, Powder Technol. 294 (2016) 168–176.
[2] C.N. Hamelinck, G.v Hooijdonk, A.P.C. Faaij, Ethanol from lignocellulosic
biomass: techno-economic performance in short-, middle- and long-term,
Biomass Bioenergy 28 (2005) 384–410.
[3] Y. Sun, J. Cheng, Hydrolysis of lignocellulosic materials for ethanol
production: a review, Bioresour. Technol. 83 (2002) 1–11.
[4] A.M. Castro, N. Pereira-Jr, Production, properties and application of cellulose
in the hydrolysis of agroindustrial residues, Quim. Nova 33 (2010) 181–188.
[5] M.H. Bilir, Investigation of the Absorption of Remazol Brillant Blue R Dye from
Aqueous Solution onto Olive Stone, Kilis 7 Aralık University Graduate School
of Natural and Applied Sciences, Department of Chemistry, 2009, MSc. Thesis.
[6] R.J. Evans, S. Czernik, E. Chornet, C.J. Feik, R. French, S.D. Philips, Engineering
Scale Up of Renewable Hydrogen Production by Catalytıc Steam Reforming of
Peanut Shells Pyrolysis Products Hydrogen Fuel Cells and Infrastructure
Technologies 2003 Progress Report, 200249–58.
[7] R.S. Rohella, N. Sahoo, V. Chakravortty, Lignin macromolecule, Resonance
(August) (1997) 60–66.
[8] ASTM WK30419 – New Guide for the Use of Agricultural Fiber in
Construction, 2011.
[9] J. Somlai, V. Jobbagy, J. Kovacs, S. Tarjan, T. Kovacs, Radiological aspects of the
usability of red mud as building material additive, J. Hazard. Mater. 150
(2008) 541–545.
[10] H. Binici, O. Aksogan, A.H. Sevinc, A. Kucukonder, Mechanical and
radioactivity shielding performances of mortars made with colemanite,
barite, ground basaltic pumice and ground blast furnace slag, Constr. Build.
Mater. 50 (2014) 177–183.
[11] A. Briga-Sa, N. Da Teixeira, J. Pinto, F. Caldeira, H. Varum, A. Paiva, Textile
waste as an alternative thermal insulation building material solution, Constr.
Build. Mater. 38 (2013) 155–160.
[12] A. Ergun, Effects of the usage of diatomite and waste marble powder as partial
replacement of cement on the mechanical properties of concrete, Constr.
Build. Mater. 25 (2011) 806–812.
[13] H. Binici, F. Yucegok, O. Aksogan, H. Kaplan, Effect of corncob, wheat straw
and plane leaf ashes as mineral admixtures on concrete durability ASCE, Civil
Eng. Mater. 20 (2008) 478–483.
[14] M. Vijayalakshmi, A.S.S. Sekar, G. Ganeshprabhu, Strength and durability
properties of concrete made with granite industry waste, Constr. Build. Mater.
46 (2013) 1–7.
[15] O. Kayali, Fly ash lightweight aggregates in high performance concrete,
Constr. Build. Mater. 22 (2008) 2393–2399.
[16] A. Benazzouk, O. Douzane, K. Mezreb, B. Laidoudi, M. Queı́neudec, Thermal
conductivity of cement composites containing rubber waste particles:
experimental study and modelling, Constr. Build. Mater. 22 (2008) 573–579.
[17] B. Yesilata, Y. Isıker, P. Turgut, Thermal insulation enhancement in concretes
by adding waste PET and rubber pieces, Constr. Build. Mater. 23 (2009)
1878–1882.
[18] H. Binici, R. Gemci, H. Kaplan, Physical and mechanical properties of mortar
without cement, Constr. Build. Mater. 28 (2012) 357–361.
[19] H. Binici, R. Gemci, A. Kucukonder, Investigating the sound insulation,
thermal conductivity and radioactivity of chipboards produced with cotton
waste, fly ash and barite, Constr. Build. Mater. 30 (2012) 826–832.
[20] Directive 2010/31/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council on the
Energy Performance of Buildings, Official Journal of the European Union,
2010; 19: 153–162.
[21] P. de Wilde, M. Voorden, Providing computational support for the election of
energy saving building components, Energy Build. 36 (2004) 749–758.
[22] H. Binici, M. Eken, M. Dolaz, O. Aksogan, M. Kara, An environmentally friendly
thermal insulation material from sunflower stalk, textile waste and stubble
fibres, Constr. Build. Mater. 51 (2014) 24–33.
[23] H. Binici, O. Aksogan, Engineering properties of insulation materials made
with cotton waste and fly ash, J. Mater. Cycles Waste Manage. 17 (2015)
157–162.
[24] I. Yoshitake, S. Ueno, Y. Ushio, H. Arano, S. Fukumoto, Abrasion and skid
resistance of recyclable fly ash concrete pavement made with limestone
aggregate, Constr. Build. Mater. 112 (2016) 440–446.
[25] Turkish Standard EN TS 196-2, Methods of testing cement, determination of
strength, European Standards, 1997.
[26] TS EN 13279-1, Gypsum Binders and Gypsum Plasters–Part 1: Definitions and
Requirements, Ankara, 2009.
[27] TS EN 2823, Standard Members of Pumice, Definitions and Requirements,
Ankara, 2011.
[28] ASTM C 67-03 (2003) Standard Test for Sampling and Testing Brick and
Structural Claytile. Philadelphia, PA : American Society for Testing and
Materials.
[29] ASTM C 597(1994) Standard Test Method for Pulse Velocity Through
Concrete, Annual Book of ASTM Standard.
[30] ASTMC 1113-90 (1990) Test Method for Thermal Conductivity of Refractories
by Hot Wire.
[31] TS EN 415, Turkish standard (1977) Calculations’ value of the thermal
conductivity and thermal resistance for architectural and building use.
[32] J. Zach, A. Korjenic, V. Petránek, J. Hroudová, T. Bednar, Performance
evaluation and research of alternative thermal insulations based on sheep
wool, Energy Build. 49 (2012) 246–253.
[33] M.S. Al-Homoud, Performance characteristics and practical applications of
common building thermal insulation materials, Build. Environ. 40 (2005)
353–366.
[34] A. Patnaika, M. Mvubua, S. Muniyasamya, A. Bothaa, R.D. Anandjiwala,
Thermal and sound insulation materials from waste wool and recycled
polyester fibers and their biodegradation studies, Energy Build. 92 (2015)
161–169.
[35] A. Korjenic, V. Petránek, J. Zach, J. Hroudová, Development and performance
evaluation of natural thermal-insulation materials composed of renewable
resources, Energy Build. 43 (2011) 2518–2523.